Alexander - Great Enough?
The release of Hollywood war epic Alexander has left American audiences cold and historians cringing. Whilst British teenagers queue up at the box office to ogle at Colin Farrell's newly built physique, film-lovers wonder how a project with such potential could have gone so disastrously wrong.Surely a historical tale of such heroism, lavish setting and beautiful people could only equal the successes of Braveheart and Gladiator. But whilst cinematography, costume design and music are some of the best in Hollywood's history, the central problem appears to be casting.
Oliver Stone's interpretation of the warrior's life has come under such criticism that the director himself has apologised for doing Alexander the greatest disservice - casting a brash young Irishman as the Greek hero.
Farrell was chosen to play the almost-mythical figure for his confidence and rebellious spirit, but what's missing is the gentle, more human factor and of course the paltry matter of Alexander's Hellenistic rearing.
The film's producers will try to convince you that each actor's accent was chosen specifically to reflect the wide array of dialects at the time. This is not a plausible excuse for Farrell's Celtic tones, or for the fact that the rest of the cast eventually follows suit in deference to the star.
Robin Lane Fox, historical advisor to Stone, has been studying the great hero for over thirty years and rejects criticism of Farrell's portrayal on the grounds that even historians have no clear picture of who Alexander was and so any interpretation is valid. He claims that any figure who lived in ancient times remains a mystery and those who try to work them out can only guess at the truth.
It's not difficult to see why Stone felt his star might identify with the warrior who conquered 90% of the known world by the age of 25. Farrell rose from the playhouses of Dublin and Ballykissangel to the Hollywood screen in no time, to become a star of the highest degree. He still rides the wave of this achievement in the face of unrelenting tabloid attention to frequent bar brawls and the surprise revelation that he's a father.
Alexander the Great never suffered a military defeat, and coupled with his generosity of spirit and erotic inclinations toward those around him, specifically family and close friends, he makes the ideal Hollywood leading man. But Farrell as the current golden boy of film just can't cut it.
The film is interpretative, as are all works of historical fiction, but couldn't Stone and Farrell have made a more convincing stab at the truth?
